Outsourcing

Published 7:00 pm, Saturday, January 29, 2005

The Marine One photo op on the White House lawn makes the presidential helicopter famous. It is unthinkable that Marine One be anything but an all-American product.

Sikorsky Aircraft, based in Stratford, is the company that traditionally builds presidential helicopters.

But it lost out to a consortium put together by Lockheed Martin, based in Maryland.

The Lockheed design is actually a British-Italian product. In order to counter criticism of putting the president in a foreign-made helicopter, Lockheed agreed to have some American contractors.

The engines will be built by General Electric in Lynn, Mass. A new manufacturing plant will be built in Owego, N.Y., to work on the project.

But key components will be built overseas, and this $6.1 billion contract for 23 helicopters will mean a net loss of American jobs.

Is this a new avenue for outsourcing American jobs? Well, yes.

It also outsources the development of advanced helicopter technology and gives the Lockheed-European helicopter the edge in future Pentagon purchases.

As House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, a California Republican, said: "It is difficult to understand why we would use U.S. tax dollars to fund the further development of foreign helicopter technology."

Was this decision just about picking the best helicopter? No.

Lockheed's European partners waged an aggressive and offensive campaign against Sikorsky, insisting the Pentagon should share its business with British and Italian companies in return for British and Italian support for Bush policies on Iraq.

So Connecticut and Sikorsky lost a big one.

"I am at a loss to explain why the Navy and the president would choose anything other than an all-American helicopter built by the company that has a flawless, 45-year track record," Governor Rell said. "It simply doesn't make any sense. I'm angry and I'm disappointed."

The Navy defended its decision by praising the Lockheed-European design as more powerful, wider and longer. The Sikorsky "Super Hawk" has two engines. The Lockheed "US101" has three engines.

Can this decision be reversed? That's not clear. But Congress needs to examine what went on here.

At first glance, and at second glance, this decision appears to have been improperly influenced by the administration's foreign policy interests.